Firms' development of their staff has been an important bellwether. Mayer Brown hit the bottom of the rankings again, slated for weak leadership and poor prospects; whilst prospects seem pretty rosy at Hammonds and Latham & Watkins, which jointly topped the chart.
Latham staff seem to be an unfeasibly happy bunch (despite the long hours), and its staff's thoughts on their development at the US giant were pretty positive. One lawyer explained "I feel respected even though I am very junior". Plus "partners are supportive" and "staff are made to feel appreciated." The firm's emphasis on a flat hierarchy seems to be paying off, with junior lawyers praising the high level of responsibility they get despite their greenness and the majority of commenters feeling pretty optimistic about promotion prospects.
Over at Hammonds, trainees praised the "opportunity to have contact with clients" and the fact that work was "interesting...not just photocopying". Even at the more qualified level comments were overwhelmingly positive. The firm was picked out for offering "a decent level of responsibility for your level", "excellent prospects" and attracting "ambitious staff". Insiders also reckoned that the recent merger with Squire Sanders had "the potential to really improve and develop" the firm.
Mayer Brown was quite a different story, however. The firm again found itself in the doldrums, scoring a miserable 43% as a result of "little scope for pay rises or promotion". According to one lawyer "All the good NQs went somewhere else on qualification", which is hardly a ringing endorsement of perceived career prospects at the firm.
Things were little better at CMS Cameron McKenna which scored a mediocre 46% (second from bottom). The firm was criticised for "an inability to recognise high performers and deal with low performers" and the "ability of senior management to drive morale into the ground". Macfarlanes, which also scored 46%, was slammed for "nepotism" and "cliqueyness" with one respondent claiming "both assistants and clients are voting with their feet and leaving for the MC."
Check out the winners and losers in full here.
Tip Off ROF
Latham staff seem to be an unfeasibly happy bunch (despite the long hours), and its staff's thoughts on their development at the US giant were pretty positive. One lawyer explained "I feel respected even though I am very junior". Plus "partners are supportive" and "staff are made to feel appreciated." The firm's emphasis on a flat hierarchy seems to be paying off, with junior lawyers praising the high level of responsibility they get despite their greenness and the majority of commenters feeling pretty optimistic about promotion prospects.
Over at Hammonds, trainees praised the "opportunity to have contact with clients" and the fact that work was "interesting...not just photocopying". Even at the more qualified level comments were overwhelmingly positive. The firm was picked out for offering "a decent level of responsibility for your level", "excellent prospects" and attracting "ambitious staff". Insiders also reckoned that the recent merger with Squire Sanders had "the potential to really improve and develop" the firm.
Mayer Brown was quite a different story, however. The firm again found itself in the doldrums, scoring a miserable 43% as a result of "little scope for pay rises or promotion". According to one lawyer "All the good NQs went somewhere else on qualification", which is hardly a ringing endorsement of perceived career prospects at the firm.
Things were little better at CMS Cameron McKenna which scored a mediocre 46% (second from bottom). The firm was criticised for "an inability to recognise high performers and deal with low performers" and the "ability of senior management to drive morale into the ground". Macfarlanes, which also scored 46%, was slammed for "nepotism" and "cliqueyness" with one respondent claiming "both assistants and clients are voting with their feet and leaving for the MC."
 |
Macfarlanes yesterday |
Check out the winners and losers in full here.